Thinking of buying a 97B

[Hermo Gut]

Walt ,

       I was just trying to discuss one possible merit of this kind of safety, that is , hammer down with a loaded chamber (condition 2) safety lever on.

       Although I myself do not advocate Condition 2 carry mode , many of us have in one way or another carried our pistol this way, lets be honest.I own a Walther P99 that I sometimes carry with this mode but since it has no external safeties except for a decocker and of course the trigger , the long DA trigger pull is what separates it from unwanted/wanted discharge.

       On the other hand , my Jericho 941FS could also be carried this way (condition 2) but with the safety lever on.This feature ensures added protection by disabling the trigger mechanism which by the way is already a safety feature by itself.

       Can you imagine a Glock being carried this way (condition 2)? I think for this kind of pistol , Israeli Combat Draw works better.Yes it has the safe action system but in the absence of a decocker & external safety lever (except for the trigger) it would not be advisable to do so.

       Policemen, of course, are far more susceptible to gun grabbers because of the exposure that's why gun & gun retention training is a must course for them, but we cannot discount the fact that many a policemen had already passed away because of gun grabbing incidents. For an average civilian gun owner , an added safety feature (internally or externally) is still the best ,no matter how redundant it may seem.

       Why do you think companies like IMI , Tanfoglio/Witness and HK have this added safety feature on their pistols? These companies produce a living out of making guns ,they should know better than the rest of us here. It's public safety & liability suits that they are more concerned of, plus of course, the added insurance.

       If these companies swim upstream , I  don't mind going with them.  

[Shlomo Ha Melech]

Quote:Why do you think companies like IMI , Tanfoglio/Witness and HK have this added safety feature on their pistols?

IMHO the reason they added this "safety feature" is because of all the harassment and ludicrous lawsuits instigated by the second lowest form of life on earth, attorneys.

If you don't pull the trigger the gun does not go bang.
I don't know of any modern revolver that has a safety, and they are carried with the hammer down on a loaded chamber.

[Walt-Sherrill]

I thought I replied to this one, as well... but don't see it.  (Every once in a while good 'ole EZBOARD does strange things.)

Why have a safety that engages in both modes?  

I've been in business for a long time.  I see an innovative product developement person come up with a new idea, and see an innovative marketing person try to turn this "feature" (call it "bug" in software) into a "benefit."  

Why is it there?  Because it can be.   Is it needed?  Only the gun gods know and they ain't talking.

Why does Ruger offer a model with decocker only, and another model with  decocker and safety -- using the same lever.  You can't convince me that a decocker-based gun needs a safety.

Why don't DAO guns have safeties -- if gun grabbing is an issue.  The vast majority of DAO guns -- used by police departments, mostly -- don't have safeties.

The reasoning behind all of this is obscure, and exceeds our ability to decipher...  But don't assume, because something is there, its there for a functional reason.  It may be nothing than a stupid design feature that someone in Marketing thought would differentiate their product from the competition.

[crt360]

While I only have one pistol with the extra safety (Steyr M40), I don't have any problem with companies making them or people using them and it's not because I am apparently the second lowest form of life on earth.  I've seen people accidentally pull the trigger when they were startled or tripped and I'm very glad I wasn't at the muzzle end of their guns.  These incidents involved shotguns and could have been prevented if they had been using the safety.  (As a result, I've become much more selective about who I hunt with.)  I've also had someone tell me they did this with their revolver (DA pull) and it scared the hell out of them.  WTSHTF a lot of people (no CZForum members, of course) are as likely to walk around with their finger on the trigger as they are to forget to take the safety off, and as the one guy (with the revolver) told me the extra weight of the DA pull seemed nonexistent under the conditions.  The "best safety is the one between your ears" is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever heard.  A functioning brain is certainly helpful, but some fail with alarming frequency.  If someone feels more comfortable carrying with an extra level of safety and practices using it, I'm not going to discourage them.

[Walt-Sherrill]

Quote: The "best safety is the one between your ears" is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever heard.

I disagree.  Just because some dumb-a$$es won't use it doesn't mean its not the best.  

The next step, if we follow your approach to its logical conclusion, is to have a grip safety and a magazine safety, a triple retention holster, and maybe a voice recognition circuit so that the gun won't fire until you say, "Fire!"

Perhaps we should take this same approach with autos -- as a LOT MORE FOLKS ARE KILLED IN AUTO ACCIDENTS than are killed by guns??

[crt360]

Walt,

I'll withdraw "the biggest bunch of crap" tag I put on it, but I still cringe when I hear it.  It may be a good message to give to people during gun safety lessons, but for the very reason you point out, "because some dumb-a$$es won't use it" and I tend to believe it's more like "a lot of dumb-a$$es won't use it," it isn't the best safety.  Why is the manual safety better?  Because it takes a lot more thought and effort to safely handle a firearm than it does to flick a safety switch.  An idiot can do it and greatly reduce the risk of shooting him/herself or someone nearby.  A non-idiot can put the safety on and use the safety between his/her ears.  There are some folks out there who think their brain is better than it is and this message gives them the idea that they don't need to use the simple safety their gun has on it.  Now you've got a dumb-a$$ with his safety off and little between the ears walking next to you with a loaded 12 gauge.  I also think there are a lot experienced hunters and possibly recreational shooters that may have a brief lapse in good sense or be distracted at times.
 

Quote:The next step, if we follow your approach to its logical conclusion, is to have a grip safety and a magazine safety, a triple retention holster, and maybe a voice recognition circuit so that the gun won't fire until you say, "Fire!"

I'm not sure how you've defined my approach or reached its logical conclusion, but I'm not in favor of a bunch of crazy safety gizmos on guns.  Basically, all I said is if you want to use a safety, I'm not going to discourage you.

Quote:Perhaps we should take this same approach with autos -- as a LOT MORE FOLKS ARE KILLED IN AUTO ACCIDENTS than are killed by guns??

I believe we have taken this approach with automobiles - licensing drivers, traffic laws, police, seat belts, safety glass, air-bags, ABS brakes, warning lights, laser-controlled cruise control, run-flat tires, etc. - all with some improvement in safety and still human error (failure of the thing between the ears) results in something like 50,000 traffic accident deaths per year (which is by some studies about a 1/4 the number of hospital negligence related deaths).

I am not making an anti-gun statement (and I hope it is not interpreted as such) nor implying that we should baby-proof the world, and I apologize if I attacked someone's favorite saying, but as a hunter/shooter, lover of guns and the outdoors since I was kid, I can see a place in the world for a simple manual safety on rifles/shotguns/pistols for those who want to use them.  If you want to go hunting with me please let me know whether or not you'll be carrying with your safety on.  As far as pistols, I can carry my CZ cocked and locked and someone else can carry their Witness uncocked and locked - we still go through the same basic movements to shoot the thing.

[Walt-Sherrill]

And I didn't mean to come down quite so forcefully in response to your comment.

We've had a long series of messages on this and related topics, and you come in at the end, an innocent bystander, and get hit by friendly fire.  <Sorry.>  

Gun safeties won't work if you don't use them.  Idiots will still trip with their finger on the trigger and the safety off.  You understand that, as do I.

While cars are FULL of safety devices, most of those devices protect the occupants, not the innocent bystanders who are killed.   A drunken driver, for example, can still ram a stopped school bus at high speed -- and an idiot with a shotgun can still discharge the weapon while crossing a fence...

We can probably both agree that a lot of folks have guns (and, I think, cars) who shouldn't -- and extra safeties on the gun and in the cars don't do enough.

Its a shame that we can't make good sense as readily available as extra safety devices.

[Hermo Gut]

"As far as pistols, I can carry my CZ cocked and locked and someone else can carry their Witness uncocked and locked - we still go through the same basic movements to shoot the thing. "


     Precisely! The degree of safety awareness counts most. If one is uneasy carrying a cocked & locked pistol then an option of carrying it in condition 2, safety lever on, would be a logical alternative.Even Condition 3 (loaded magazine , empty chamber) carry mode would tactically suffice if one is well versed with the draw method.  In short , it's always nice to know that an equally safe & effective option is given to the Firearm owning public. I guess that's one of the main reason why some gun makers/users  prefer the added safety feature , internally or externally, that group I belong.

[viking442]

I'll add this... because I see it all the time...    Too many folks are fearful of their own weapon.  They walk around with the hammer down, safety on and empty chambers.  Statistically, you do NOT have much time, if any, to load and make ready in a gun fight. 3 feet, 3 rounds in 3 seconds.  

For me it is always hammer down (for DA first pull) and one in the pipe.

[crt360]

Walt,

No problem.  I've read most of the threads on the forum in the last couple of years and I'm usually silent because you've said pretty much what I was thinking.

[reveasy]

Gentlemen, I agree - but I am an absolute bug on the subject of options, of choices - the more options, the better. I don't use the safeties on my CZs or Witnesses very often - but when I want them (notice I didn't say need them, they're there. Cheap choices. Makes sense to me, I don't insist others agree: that's what makes a poker game. ;-)

[Walt-Sherrill]

Feel the same way about suspenders AND belts?  <grin>

[reveasy]

As a matter of fact, I do use Perry suspenders to help with my pistol belt!